Tuesday, May 19, 2009

They don't want me

Grades are in and they’re looking more like Fonzie all the time (aaaaaaa).

 

Thanks to a particularly frustrating process regarding the fall semester, I’m no longer completely certain that I’ll have enough time to train for the marathon next year.  I am, though, still seriously considering the half.  One of those two races will be run in January.  The second marathon may have to wait until 2011.  The problem is the sudden changing of gears that is going on.  If I have to change up my class mix away from what I’ve been preparing for, then I may have to put in more work that I was expecting on classes.  More work in one area means less time available for work in another, and something has to go.  As the last man on the totem pole, the marathon will have to be cut.  Unless, that is, things straighten themselves out soon.

 

Oh yea, and musical ring tones annoy the crap out of me.  ESPECIALLY the ones that you’re forced to listen to when you call someone.  I don’t want to listen to your music while I wait for you to answer the phone.  That’s really, really annoying.

 

 

So, anyway, there are several reasons why I’m not a republican or a democrat.  I’m not a democrat less because of policy differences and more because of philosophy differences.  I’m not a republican for the exact opposite reasons.  As just one example:

 

Abortion: 

 

The Republican Party seems to think there should be a law banning abortions, leaving exceptions for rape and incest and health of the mother.  Which is to say that babies are always a blessing, unless they’re the product of rape or incest or medical irresponsibility, in which case the baby should be punished for the actions of the criminals or parents, along with the criminals.  Forget the fact that any pregnancy can run at least some risk of harming the health of the mother—even if that risk is extremely remote.

 

The Democrat Party seems to think that any abortion, anytime, anywhere, and for anyone should be always legal and it’s a decision solely between a woman and her doctor—nobody else.  And if they could make them free, so be it.  After all, nobody should be punished for a simple mistake with a lifetime responsibility of a baby.  Because, you know, that’s what a baby is, punishment.

Personally, I don’t think either of them are completely right, but those are our choices.

 

Me?  No, I’m not in favor of abortion at all, but by the time the decision whether or not to have an abortion comes up, several other failed opportunities have presented themselves.  Both participants failed to abstain, if the act is consensual.  At least one participant failed to adhere to social and legal codes with regards to sexual conduct and violence if it was not consensual.  They failed to practice safe sex.  They failed to use birth control.  They failed to consider the potential consequences of their actions.  They failed to adequately prepare for the consequences for their actions.  Babies aren’t like weeds.  It’s not like you wake up one morning and suddenly dandelions are growing in your yard and you have no idea where they came from.  Several actions must take place before a baby is conceived, and before each action there is an opportunity to make a choice.  (Excepting, of course, in the case of conception following rape where the choice was not mutual, the victim had no voice in the matter, and the rapist has no parental rights.  Even then, though, the view of the child as a man-made event or a true blessing is a cultural difference, not a legal designation.  “He did this to me” versus “He did this for me”, depends on who the speaker considers “He” to be.)  And for some people, the final choice is one in favor of abortion and in certain circumstances it’s a perfectly reasonable choice.  For others, though, it is simply not a choice, not ever, and no law legalizing or banning something changes that, ever.  The fact that purple hair is legal doesn’t mean I’m going to dye my hair.  Ban purple hair and people are still going to dye their hair, they’re just going to do it secretly.  Some people choose to go to college.  Others never considered any other option.

 

But, you see, because I do see abortion as a choice for some and I’m not in favor of banning it for all, the republicans don’t want me.  And as a father who believes he has a stake in the well being (and existence) of his child(ren), I can’t philosophically call myself a democrat.  If I were a member of parties today, though, I’d be expelled from the republican party as “not ideologically pure enough” and embraced by the democrat party as a “conservative democrat”, even if they don’t really care what I think.   And this story can be retold with regulation, and taxes, and a whole litany of other issues where on the one hand I can go with the policy but not the philosophy, and on the other hand I can go with the philosophy but not the policy.

 

The libertarians and greens have long been ideologically narrow parties.  People who weren’t “conservative enough” for the libertarians voted for the lesser evil of the Republican Party.  People who weren’t liberal enough to be greens would do likewise for the Democrat Party.  If the Republican Party is going to fight for ideological purity and send people to the next lesser evil, and the dems are willing to make their tent bigger to accommodate lesser evils, then within the 2 party system we’re going to have a long tale of single party governance with a perpetual opposition, rather than a true 2 party system.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home